News you won't see in controlled mainstream media.

Hi Bex

Since we've seen an example of the fossils themselves, we've also seen that not only are the missing links "missing"

Well except for all the ones that we do have and there are lots of those. It’s only by defining each now transitional as the mid point between two new missing links that you gain the false impression that something essential is missing. This is a common YEC tactict but it’s worthess if you actually want to understand what’s going on, it’s only use is to confuse people. Is that what you are trying to do here Bex?

even the ones they claim as "missing links" were shown to exist around the sametime period as the very creatures they had supposedly evolved into.

I’m yet to see anyone explain why a transitional must only exist at the time of arrival of a new species. Species change character today as we watch them and species split into separate species today as we watch them. Why should we expect that it would be any different in the past? Just because a bird evolved from an intermediate like archaeopteryx (if that was how it happened) does not mean that archaeopteryx had to go extinct. The bird may well have been a refinement for a new niche while archaeopteryx still made a good living in it’s old niche. We see this happening today so why should we doubt that it would happen in the past. There is no reason that a transitional organism could not exist in parallel with the later form for some time and the fossil evidence shows this time and again and there is no reason to think that we will always have the oldest example of any given organism.

If we look at birds we see that feathers arose first on creatures who could not fly. After this archaeopteryx arose and some time later birds arose and later yet modern birds that we could recognize arose. That is what you would expect if ToE were true. Archaeopteryx coexisted with ancient birds for some time before dying out. No modern birds existed at this time in fact if we go back very far in the fossil record we quickly find that there are no modern species at all in the record. No species alive today was alive at the time of the dinosaurs though some similar species did exist and lead to modern forms. Go back to the Cambrian and no recognizable modern species existed at all. If we go back just a little further we find no animals at all though there are lots of fossils going back for several billion years before that point.

To ask if there was an agreement between them as to who would die out first shows a very profound misunderstanding of ToE. Creatures die out because they can’t make a living anymore quite often because they are replaced by more efficient forms who eat them out of house and home or even simply eat them. Agreement has nothing what so ever to do with it.

So in other words, the animals can mix together with their supposed missing links whilst alive, but they all died in a particular order.

Are you aware of the well observed phenomenon of isolation? It can be geographic or it can be genetic but organisms of the same species get split into separate, non interbreeding populations, all the time. Obviously once separated by whatever means each population will continued to evolve but it is free to do so on different directions from its estranged cousins. Existing at the same time does not mean that they were or could interbreed, we see this sort of isolation in action today so why should we doubt that it occurred historically, that’s a fallacy and is again one of the common YEC complaints designed to confuse those who don’t know much about these questions.

Here are a couple of ancient bird examples (no different than today).

This is actually wrong Bex. These are modern birds, modern in character and abilities, yes but they are not species that we could recognize. None of these species still exist today. All of these species have ling since died out.

All the best Bex

Russell